I remember how Apple was ridiculed when they said their G4s were "super computers". But in fact they were right. There was a government standard for those and they met that. Compared to the ENIAC any old 386 box would pass as a supercomputer. And compared to my iMac DV the G5 very well goes as workstation. But we have to see that standards shift. And for a workstation it just misses features. I mean, come on: No second 8X AGP slot, you must be kiddin' me...;-P
"[...] their new font management system in Jaguar, which someone said "companies made a living off of", and now that business is gone, integrated into the macos."
The existing font managing tools are so terrible, terrible, terrible I just can't believe it. No way to use them effectivly. I just pray that Apple got it right and that it will work on my old slow Mac. I have a 400 Mhz G3 with 576 MB RAM and plenty of free diskspace, but all solutions choked on my ~5000 fonts. I don't want to use them all at once, just some help to handle them. Oh it's so terrible, terrible... If FontBook (what has Thorsten Lemke to say about the name anyway?) nails it, I'll fly to Cupertino and clean Steve's Mac (Or does he still have that NextStep PC?).
"except that DivX isn't good example. It's just not something that I see standing the test of time."
Hehe, I see your point, but note that DVD player makers are starting to support some DivX formats (I say "starting" because it seems to not working that perfectly well). And then some stuff only comes as DivX (or Xvid or whatever) and I want to watch it. Two years ago that was really a problem on my old slow iMac. PC users laughed at me and rightly so.
"[...] know OS X users who are heavily into burning VCDs from DivX, but they are ones with more Unix experience and are willing to mess around in dark areas [...]"
But only because there is no software with a Look-Mom-No-Brains-approach like iTunes or so.
"would you be willing to put your company on the line by wading into a grey legal area?"
Yeah, well, obviously dozens of Windows Software producers do that and not only small or unimportant ones?!
For one the grandparent talked about copying in the posting. Second I don't trust a lousy clipboard that far. Means cut and paste would be far to dangerous IMHO.
Just as Apple innovated itself out of a crisis they could have come up with stuff that still is badly needed on the Mac.
Like: Even with FfmpegX, OSEX, 42 and the MissingWhateverToolsStuff the whole DVD-ripping-DivX-VCD-area on the Mac still needs some professional software company to engage in that field. This thing is the only I envy Windows-PC users for. They have some good easy to use and fast apps.
" Why not make it just like copy where you can select the file, go to the edit menu and click copy, and then navigate to where you want to paste the file?"
Uhhhh... (what the...?) What exactly gives you the idea that it doesn't work like that?
"EXCELLENT support (although RedHat has support, it is very expensive.)"
Uhm... seriously, when was the last time you called SuSE support? A lot has changed there. The SuSE support of old you knew now is kinda expensive too...
Next time read my post more carefully:) You are totally right, but: I never said that Apple alone did AppleLink. They just did the GUI. The underlying structure came from GE Information Services Co., which also ran it. It was introduced in 1985. The next AppleLink, the one from Quantum and Apple was first called "AppleLink - Personal Edition" when introduced 1988 only for Apple II users.
I didn't want to make it too complicated. After all this is./;-P
And also it makes Apple look pretty much braindead back in those days:-D
What most people won't know:
on
Glory Days at AOL
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
There once was a very small company called Quantum Computer Services, running an online service for users with Commodore machines. Then there was another company called Apple who had an online service for its employees and dealers called "AppleLink", which was all graphical interface and real easy to use. They wanted something like that for the general public and thought about buying Quantum. But then they decided to go joint venture. When Apple got reorganized (something they did on a monthly basis in these days...) they decided to drop AppleLink and instead payed Quantum to finish the Mac beta and market it under their own name. 1991 Quantum was renamed AOL and put the software on the market not only for Mac but Windows too.
Then Apple changed their mind and payed AOL money to use their code (which they kinda financed before...) for a new Apple online service called eWorld. (This was before the cool prefix was the "i") eWorld got online 1994 Mac only. It was shipped in the end of 1995 with every Mac (?...) and closed in March 1996 because the world in the mid 90s needed another online service as much as (insert what you want here).
"The original iMac was hailed (by some) as a 'design classic'. Surely if this were actually the case, it would have had a lifespan of longer than five years?"
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe they used screws... (Looking at the G5s the picture semms ok)
Yup, it's here.
So, what you mean is: as Damage is at home in the US, the situation could be different?
13. 11 of them shown on FOX. Complete series on DVD out by December.
Anyone has an idea where to take a look at older entries from the last Sundance Online Film Festivals? Nothing on their website(s).
What planet exactly have you been on the during the last decade?
(Hint: MultiMedia architecture invented at Apple in 1991, also the base format for MPEG4) more info..., even more info...
I remember how Apple was ridiculed when they said their G4s were "super computers". But in fact they were right. There was a government standard for those and they met that. Compared to the ENIAC any old 386 box would pass as a supercomputer. And compared to my iMac DV the G5 very well goes as workstation. But we have to see that standards shift. And for a workstation it just misses features. I mean, come on: No second 8X AGP slot, you must be kiddin' me... ;-P
Not well, IIRC the seti folks were reluctant to do certain optimizations for the Mac. The distributed.net stuff works much better.
The existing font managing tools are so terrible, terrible, terrible I just can't believe it. No way to use them effectivly. I just pray that Apple got it right and that it will work on my old slow Mac. I have a 400 Mhz G3 with 576 MB RAM and plenty of free diskspace, but all solutions choked on my ~5000 fonts. I don't want to use them all at once, just some help to handle them. Oh it's so terrible, terrible... If FontBook (what has Thorsten Lemke to say about the name anyway?) nails it, I'll fly to Cupertino and clean Steve's Mac (Or does he still have that NextStep PC?).
Hehe, I see your point, but note that DVD player makers are starting to support some DivX formats (I say "starting" because it seems to not working that perfectly well). And then some stuff only comes as DivX (or Xvid or whatever) and I want to watch it. Two years ago that was really a problem on my old slow iMac. PC users laughed at me and rightly so.
"[...] know OS X users who are heavily into burning VCDs from DivX, but they are ones with more Unix experience and are willing to mess around in dark areas [...]"
But only because there is no software with a Look-Mom-No-Brains-approach like iTunes or so.
"would you be willing to put your company on the line by wading into a grey legal area?"
Yeah, well, obviously dozens of Windows Software producers do that and not only small or unimportant ones?!
Peep Only makes copies to DVD-R, no options to do DivXs and VCDs/SVCDs/CVDs/bla...
For one the grandparent talked about copying in the posting. Second I don't trust a lousy clipboard that far. Means cut and paste would be far to dangerous IMHO.
Like: Even with FfmpegX, OSEX, 42 and the MissingWhateverToolsStuff the whole DVD-ripping-DivX-VCD-area on the Mac still needs some professional software company to engage in that field. This thing is the only I envy Windows-PC users for. They have some good easy to use and fast apps.
Uhhhh... (what the...?) What exactly gives you the idea that it doesn't work like that?
Uhm... seriously, when was the last time you called SuSE support? A lot has changed there. The SuSE support of old you knew now is kinda expensive too...
Again?? Damn... That must be like the 27th time.
I didn't want to make it too complicated. After all this is ./ ;-P
And also it makes Apple look pretty much braindead back in those days :-D
Then Apple changed their mind and payed AOL money to use their code (which they kinda financed before...) for a new Apple online service called eWorld. (This was before the cool prefix was the "i") eWorld got online 1994 Mac only. It was shipped in the end of 1995 with every Mac (?...) and closed in March 1996 because the world in the mid 90s needed another online service as much as (insert what you want here).
So I guess we're gettin G5s for real? That would be like Xmas and easter on one day :-D
OS News pulled the story too:
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3735
Apple Insider still has it:
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=114
Check this.
(No I'm not affiliated in any way with this guy)
I will believe it when I see it
Nah, the phrase we die-hard Mac fans use (when talking about the G5) is:
I want to believe
It runs Windows? I never had imagined...
So? You try to tell me in the last 3 years she saw the light, became an OSS afficionado and UNIX professional? Well, that could have happened...
Giga information group rings a bell with me too, old MS yay and Apple/Linux/everything else nay sayers :)
Five years in computers is a very long life span.